Developing a geographic inquiry process skills scale

Figures & data

Table 1. The steps of the geographic inquiry process and the items related to these steps.

Steps	Descriptions	Reference	The items associated with the steps
Posing Geographic Questions	It is about recognising a geographic subject or problem and posing geographical questions.	ACARA (Australia), 2017; EDB (Hong Kong), 2017; GENIP, 2012; MEB (Turkey), 2005; MoE (Singapore), 2013; Road Map for 21st Century Geography Education Project, 2013; Roberts, 2003, 2013	1–2–3–4
Acquiring Geographic Information	It is about how, by using which sources and by which means the information about a subject or problem is collected in order to answer geographical questions, and the methods followed in the collection process.	GENIP, 2012; MoE, 2013; OC (Ontario, Canada), 2018; QCA (the UK), 2004; 2013; Roberts, 2003, 2013; SEAB (Singapore), 2018	5–6–7–8–9–10–11–12–13–14
Organising Geographic Information	It is about the organising of the information obtained from various sources using various methods.	ACARA, 2017; GENIP, 2012; OC, 2018; Road Map for 21^st Century Geography Education Project, 2013; Roberts, 2003, 2013; SEAB, 2018	15–16–17–18
Analysing Geographic Information	It is about establishing correlations and connections using the information obtained, making explanations, and predicting the results.	GENIP, 2012; Road Map for 21^st Century Geography Education Project, 2013; Roberts, 2003, 2013	19–20–21–2223–24–25
Answering Geographic Questions	It is about testing the results/assessments reached and developing ideas/thoughts using the organised information.	OC, 2018; Road Map for 21^st Century Geography Education Project, 2013; SEAB, 2018	26–27–28–29–30
Communicating Geographic Information	It is about communicating the results of the geographical questions that are answered.	ACARA, 2017; GENIP, 2012; OC, 2018; QCA, 2004; Road Map for 21^st Century Geography Education Project, 2013; Roberts, 2003; SEAB, 2018	31–32–33–34–35–36

Table 2. Distribution of the study group by gender, class, type of school placement, school region, and type of school.

Variable	Category	N	Percentage %
Gender	Male	384	64.1
	Female	215	35.9
Class	10	312	51.4
	11	287	48.6
Type of School Placement	HSSE	255	42.6
	ABPRS	344	57.4
School Region	Altındağ	109	18.2
	Çankaya	153	25.5
	Gölbaşı	185	30.9
	Keçiören	56	9.3
	Yenimahalle	96	16.0
Type of School	Anatolian High School	187	31.2
	Social Sciences High School	111	18.5
	Religious High School	152	25.4
	Vocational High School	111	18.5
	Private High School	38	6.3

Table 3. Factor load values, common factor variance, and the variances explained by the factors*.

	Factor Load Values					Common Factor Variance
Items	PGQ	AGI	OAGI	AGQ	CGI
1 Being able to recognise the issue or problem	0.744					0.614
2 Being able to define the issue or problem	0.771					0.693
3 Being able to distinguish between geographic and non-geographic questions	0.814					0.569
4 Being able to ask geographic questions	0.651					0.476
12 Being able to select geographic information from data sources	0.518					0.422
5 Being able to determine the path to follow		0.807				0.704
6 Being able to decide the method to be used		0.891				0.781
7 Being able to detect the required information		0.769				0.661
17 Being able to convert geographic information into maps, graphs, and tables			0.591			0.501
21 Being able to read maps and graphs			0.860			0.753
22 Being able to interpret maps, graphs, tables, and photos			0.930			0.815
I23 Being able to make predictions on graphs, tables, and photos			0.859			0.768
24 Being able to compare maps, graphs, tables, and photos			0.821			0.766
26 Being able to reach conclusions				0.641		0.645
27 Being able to develop thoughts about the conclusions				0.826		0.741
28 Being able to make predictions on the future based on the conclusions				0.904		0.698
29 Being able to make a decision based on the conclusions				0.833		0.680
31 Being able to determine the fit-for-purpose way					0.610	0.667
32 Being able to use various methods					0.751	0.656
34 Being able to determine the target population correctly					0.759	0.613
35 Being able to use a clear, effective, and comprehensible way of expression					0.837	0.609
36 Being able to use geographic terms					0.623	0.513
Eigenvalue	1.096	1.032	8.743	1.243	2.232
Explained Variance	4.980	4.692	39.740	5.648	10.143
Explained Total Variance:	65.204%

*Factor load values below 0.25 were not included in the Table.

Table 4. Goodness of fit indices, reference ranges, and goodness of fit indices of the model.

Goodness of fit Indices	Reference ranges		Measurement values
	Good goodness of fit Value	Acceptable goodness of fit
p	.05 < p ≤ 1.00	.01 ≤ p ≤.05	0.0000
χ2/df	0 ≤ χ2/df ≤ 2	2 < χ2/df ≤ 3	466.36/1992.53
RMSEA	0 ≤ RMSEA ≤ .05	.05 < RMSEA ≤ .08	0.067
Goodness of Fit Index (GFI)	.95 ≤ GFI ≤ 1.00	.90 ≤ GFI < .95	0.88
Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI)	.90 ≤ AGFI ≤ 1.00	.85 ≤ AGFI < .90	0.84
Comparative Fit Index (CFI)	.97 ≤ CFI ≤ 1.00	.95 ≤ CFI < .97	0.98
Normed Fit Index (NFI)	.95 ≤ NFI ≤ 1.00	.90 ≤ NFI < .95	0.97
Standardised RMR (SRMR)	0 ≤ SRMR ≤ .05	.05 < SRMR ≤ .10	0.050

Source: Engel, Moosbrugger, and Müller (2003, p. 52).

Figure 1. Path diagram showing the factor loads of the model

Table 5. The correlation coefficients between the sub factors.

Factors	PGQ	AGI	OAGI	AGQ	CGI	Total
PGQ	1	0.661*	0.617	0.670*	0.681*	0.852*
AGI	0.661*	1	0. 509*	0. 640*	0. 703*	0.792*
OAGI	0.617*	0.509*	1	0. 653*	0. 620 *	0.832*
AGQ	0.670*	0.640*	0.653*	1	0. 762*	0.872*
CGI	0.681*	0.703*	0.620*	0.762*	1	0.888*
Total	0.852*	0.792*	0.832*	0.872*	0.888*	1

٭ P < 0.01

Table 6. Reliability coefficients.

Factors	EFA	CFA
PGQ	0.778	0.828
AGI	0.814	0.843
OAGI	0.896	0.910
AGQ	0.841	0.851
CGI	0.821	0.864
Total	0.926	0.950

Table 7. Means and standard deviations of the items, total correlations of the items, and cronbach alpha coefficient.

Factors	Items	X	S	Item-Total Correlation	Cr α Coefficient Excluding the Item
PGQ	1	3.80	0.903	0.540	0.923
	2	3.71	0.883	0.575	0.922
	3	3.81	1.000	0.565	0.923
	4	3.39	1.046	0.618	0.923
	12	3.63	1.021	0.655	0.923
AGI	5	3.56	1.024	0.644	0.923
	6	3.50	1.020	0.640	0.923
	I7	3.70	.959	0.542	0.923
OAGI	17	2.86	1.207	0.594	0.923
	21	3.31	1.194	0.648	0.923
	22	3.41	1.191	0.613	0.923
	23	3.44	1.171	0.598	0.922
	24	3.54	1.110	0.516	0.921
AGQ	26	3.80	0.939	0.544	0.921
	27	3.88	0.937	0.540	0.922
	28	3.72	0.988	0.575	0.923
	29	3.81	0.941	0.565	0.922
CGI	31	3.65	0.979	0.618	0.921
	32	3.61	1.030	0.655	0.922
	34	3.59	1.061	0.644	0.922
	35	3.72	1.055	0.640	0.924
	36	3.38	1.152	0.542	0.923

Table 8. The t values for the 27% lower and upper groups of the item analysis of the scale.

Items	(n = 84)	X	S	t
1	Lower Group	3.05	0.877	11.869
	Upper Group	4.43	0.607
2	Lower Group	2.99	0.814	11.908
	Upper Group	4.39	0.712
3	Lower Group	3.14	1.020	9.879
	Upper Group	4.49	0.720
4	Lower Group	2.71	1.001	9.824
	Upper Group	4.14	0.880
12	Lower Group	2.76	1.025	10.841
	Upper Group	4.26	0.746
5	Lower Group	2.70	0.991	10.417
	Upper Group	4.13	0.773
6	Lower Group	3.04	0.937	10.581
	Upper Group	4.38	0.693
7	Lower Group	2.92	0.972	10.556
	Upper Group	4.37	0.803
17	Lower Group	2.12	1.023	10.356
	Upper Group	3.81	1.092
21	Lower Group	2.37	1.039	12.405
	Upper Group	4.23	0.896
22	Lower Group	2.58	1.132	10.549
	Upper Group	4.29	0.951
23	Lower Group	2.55	1.102	12.374
	Upper Group	4.40	0.823
24	Lower Group	2.73	1.068	12.622
	Upper Group	4.50	0.720
26	Lower Group	3.06	1.010	11.571
	Upper Group	4.52	0.570
27	Lower Group	3.08	0.934	13.311
	Upper Group	4.64	0.530
28	Lower Group	2.98	0.994	10.539
	Upper Group	4.39	0.728
29	Lower Group	3.10	0.977	10.608
	Upper Group	4.46	0.667
31	Lower Group	2.90	0.913	12.033
	Upper Group	4.43	0.716
32	Lower Group	2.79	0.983	12.062
	Upper Group	4.38	0.710
34	Lower Group	2.76	0.965	11.236
	Upper Group	4.36	0.873
35	Lower Group	2.96	0.987	10.117
	Upper Group	4.38	0.820
36	Lower Group	2.52	0.975	10.905
	Upper Group	4.11	0.905

Table

Gender:	(F)	(M)	In which grades have you taken a geography course?	(9)	(10)		(11)		(12)
Steps			Statements	Always	Frequently	Occasionally		Rarely	Never
Posing Geographic Questions step is about identifying a geographic issue or problem and ability to pose geographic questions. Regarding the issues, problems, or questions arising from the interaction of people with their natural environments;			Being able to recognise the issue or problem	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to define the issue or problem	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to distinguish between geographic and non-geographic questions	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to ask geographic questions	□	□	□		□	□
Acquiring Geographic Information step is about how you collect the information about the subject or problem, which sources you use and in what ways you collect, and methods you follow during the collection process. To analyse the issue or problem;			Being able to determine the path to follow	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to decide the method to be used	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to detect the required information	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to decide the source to be used	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to collect the data from various sources	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to explain the reason for using various sources	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to bring the information together	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to select geographic information from data sources	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to record the collected information regularly	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to evaluate the reliability of the source of information	□	□	□		□	□
Steps			Statements	Always	Frequently	Occasionally		Rarely	Never
Organising Geographic Information step is about how you organise the information obtained from various sources with various methods. To analyse the issue or problem;			Being able to combine geographic information	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to use geographic information	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to convert geographic information into maps, graphs, and tables	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to determine whether more information is needed or not	□	□	□		□	□
Analysing Geographic Information step is about making relationships and connections using the acquired data, making explanations and predicting the results. In a way that will help analyse the issue or problem;			Being able to determine the analysis method	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to use the analysis method correctly	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to read maps and graphs	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to interpret maps, graphs, tables, and photos	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to make predictions on graphs, tables, and photos	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to compare maps, graphs, tables, and photos	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to see the relationships between cases, phenomena, and shapes	□	□	□		□	□
Answering Geographic Questions step is about testing the conclusions/evaluations that are reached using the organised information and developing ideas/thoughts. About the issue or problem;			Being able to reach conclusions	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to develop thoughts about the conclusions	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to make predictions on future based on the conclusions	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to make a decision based on the conclusions	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to propose different solutions	□	□	□		□	□
Communicating Geographic Information step is about communicating the conclusions of the geographic questions whose answers are found out When presenting the conclusion reached on the subject or problem;			Being able to determine the fit-for-purpose way	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to use various methods	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to use maps, graphs, tables, and photos	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to determine the target population correctly	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to use a clear, effective, and comprehensible way of expression	□	□	□		□	□
			Being able to use geographic terms	□	□	□		□	□

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2017). Australian Curriculum. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

 Google Scholar

Education Bureau (EDB, 2017). Curriculum documents.  Retrieved from https://www.edb.gov.hk/en/curriculumdevelopment/kla/pshe/curriculum-documents.html#3217

 Google Scholar

Geography Education National Implementation Project [GENIP]. (2012). Geography for life: National Geography Standards 2012, ( 2nd ed.). Washington, DC: National Council For Geographic Education.

 Google Scholar

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB). (2005). Coğrafya dersi öğretim programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.

 Google Scholar

Ministry of Education Singapore (MoE). (2013). Geography. Retrieved from https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses/humanities/2018

 Google Scholar

Edelson, D. C., Shavelson, R. J., & Wertheim, J. A. (Eds.). (2013). ARoad map for 21st century geography education: Assessment (A report from the Assessment Committee of the Road Map for 21st Century Geography Education Project). Washington DC: National Geographic Society.

 Google Scholar

Roberts, M. (2003). Learning through enquiry. Making sense of geography in the key stage 3. UK: Geograpical Association.

 Google Scholar

Roberts, M. (2013). Geography through enquiry. Sheffield: Geograpical Association.

 Google Scholar

Ontario Ministry of Education (OC). (2018). Ontario curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/ssciences.html

 Google Scholar

Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (QCA). (2004). Archive - National Curriculum handbook for secondary teachers in England (revised 2004). Retrieved from https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130401042742/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/QCA/04/1374

 Google Scholar

Schell, E. M., Roth, K. J., & Mohan, A. (Eds.). (2013). A road map for 21st century geography education: Geography education research (A report from the Geography Education Research). Road Map for 21st Century Geography Education Instructional Materials and Professional Development. Washington, DC: National Geographic Society.

 Google Scholar

Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board. (SEAB). (2018). Examinations. Retrieved from https://www.seab.gov.sg/

 Google Scholar

Engel, K. S., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness of fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.

 Google Scholar